The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 61 to 74 of 74
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    11,920

    Default

    most professional riders do not compete in this sport to earn money. They are just lucky that many can now make a living in the sport....but they compete and are event riders first and foremost because the love the sport. What you and I are posting JP60 is not that different.

    I have seen up close and personal now over the years how changes with the FEI have drastically changed the sport even at the lowest of levels. It has changed the type of courses we now see at novice and training level. It has changed the cost of an event at all levels. Basically...my point is the ripple effect of a rule like this can and often does have an effect that we can not always predict at all levels.

    So WE as in all of eventing are also a part of the FEI. So as long as our sport is a part of the FEI....then we should voice our concerns. We can pressure the FEI to make changes. We have to push our own voices and support our representatives there....and speak with what will be heard. I'm not willing to just give up without a fight nor am I willing to abandon the USEA or USEF or even the FEI. I'm willing to work a bit to try and improve them all. I DO like that my sport is a part of the Olympics and WEG...I do like to cheer on my team....and I want to see the sport at all levels improve and grow. So I see a dumb rule....I'm going to voice my opinion and try and get that rule changed. The basic motivation for the rule may not be something I competely disagree with...but I don't like the rule as currently drafted and do think something can be done about it. And with riders like Gina and Blyth being affected....likely something will be done if we continue to support our side and give them the motivation and power to fight for a change.
    ** The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits. -- Albert Einstein **


    2 members found this post helpful.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jun. 16, 2009
    Location
    Anderson, SC
    Posts
    581

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bornfreenowexpensive View Post
    most professional riders do not compete in this sport to earn money. They are just lucky that many can now make a living in the sport....but they compete and are event riders first and foremost because the love the sport. What you and I are posting JP60 is not that different.
    In principle I agree, in the details we differ, but then differences are good for it adds color. I think there are some that would feel Eventing would be better served not being a part of FEI while still retaining the National Organizations that help structure and guide the sport. Those learned folks I agree with as well. Our voices will not change a whit the decisions of the FEI and neither will second tier riders (FEI's view, not mine).

    In one point I disagree. A professional does compete in the sport to make money. I did not specify, because clearly they are not going to make tons from prize money. They compete to gain a name, experience, and status which translates into money. The love of the sport is a given otherwise they'd be driving cars or racing sailboats. I could be the best trainer in the world, I could have been jumping 5' log piles safely, but if I'm an unknown I wont get many students, customers at clinics, sponsors, or owners willing to have me train horses or ride them in competition. Professionals compete to make money to do what they do. A variation of Publish or Perish. Their boss is now the FEI and if they want to stay in the public eye, if they want to continue income then they will dance the FEI tune.

    I too love this sport and compete for the love of it. I too am a professional, but in programming. Yet the same applies for I have to dance to the tune of my boss if I want to continue in my passion. At the moment I am really unhappy in my job, and though I have an ultimate choice to change, at 30+ years in the industry the options are limited. I see this with the FEI and professional riders and that now makes me sad. I cannot support an organization that makes decisions affecting my sport and I have not even the power to vote against them. I can and will support professionals in the best way I can, go to clinics, buy what the sponsor, cheer them on at events either I attend or are not affiliated with the FEI.

    (My voice to the FEI is dollars. In my case the lack there of and if more people spoke, you may get change. I can go to Pine Top and watch the best riders on an Advanced course, watch amazing dressage and not pay a dime (or be happy to pay a visitor fee or volunteer, which I do). I do not need the FEI for that and if the USEF/USEA got some back bone maybe they would figure out how to get more 4* locations in the US and tell the FEI to shove their MERS and their non-compete rules up their ...own rulebook).


    1 members found this post helpful.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    17,648

    Default

    The FEI has long time professional staff who have, with I'm sure, the concurrence of the Eventing Committee made recommendations for changes which were not sent to the General Assembly--dropping the dressage coefficient was one such proposed change.

    The Eventing Committee is composed of only six people. Robert Kellerhouse is one, and Clayton Fredericks is (or was) the athlete representative on the committee. Both gentlemen have connections to North American now. Another member of the executive committee is an Australian. Then there is one Brit. The Chairman is an Italian, and there is also one French member.

    All of these people, save the Chairman, are from the big eventing nations. At least three of them are from countries which do not currently have a plethora of FEI events available for their riders.

    It makes one wonder where all the pressure for change is coming from. I simply cannot fathom why so many drastic changes have been implemented recently when all the NFs represented on the committee went on record last year as opposed to the downgrading of the CCI.

    It looks to me as if the ongoing pressure is coming from outside the eventing community.

    One does wish that the FEI were far more transparent in its politics than it is. By the time changes are recommended to the General Assembly, they are a foregone conclusion.

    A bit OT, but HSBC has bailed from the FEI.

    Another OT, but interesting bit, is that the IOC is sitting on 558 million dollars.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire


    1 members found this post helpful.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    May. 23, 2006
    Posts
    5,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JP60 View Post
    In principle I agree, in the details we differ, but then differences are good for it adds color. I think there are some that would feel Eventing would be better served not being a part of FEI while still retaining the National Organizations that help structure and guide the sport. Those learned folks I agree with as well. Our voices will not change a whit the decisions of the FEI and neither will second tier riders (FEI's view, not mine).

    In one point I disagree. A professional does compete in the sport to make money. I did not specify, because clearly they are not going to make tons from prize money. They compete to gain a name, experience, and status which translates into money. The love of the sport is a given otherwise they'd be driving cars or racing sailboats. I could be the best trainer in the world, I could have been jumping 5' log piles safely, but if I'm an unknown I wont get many students, customers at clinics, sponsors, or owners willing to have me train horses or ride them in competition. Professionals compete to make money to do what they do. A variation of Publish or Perish. Their boss is now the FEI and if they want to stay in the public eye, if they want to continue income then they will dance the FEI tune.

    I too love this sport and compete for the love of it. I too am a professional, but in programming. Yet the same applies for I have to dance to the tune of my boss if I want to continue in my passion. At the moment I am really unhappy in my job, and though I have an ultimate choice to change, at 30+ years in the industry the options are limited. I see this with the FEI and professional riders and that now makes me sad. I cannot support an organization that makes decisions affecting my sport and I have not even the power to vote against them. I can and will support professionals in the best way I can, go to clinics, buy what the sponsor, cheer them on at events either I attend or are not affiliated with the FEI.

    (My voice to the FEI is dollars. In my case the lack there of and if more people spoke, you may get change. I can go to Pine Top and watch the best riders on an Advanced course, watch amazing dressage and not pay a dime (or be happy to pay a visitor fee or volunteer, which I do). I do not need the FEI for that and if the USEF/USEA got some back bone maybe they would figure out how to get more 4* locations in the US and tell the FEI to shove their MERS and their non-compete rules up their ...own rulebook).

    I agree...competing successfully at the FEI levels is nothing more than a business card/publicity for the rider. It puts value in the ancillary products. There in lies the money/living.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    May. 17, 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by poltroon View Post
    That Gina Miles, Olympic Silver Medalist, is not qualified to run because she's had an injured horse is amusing/annoying. But, much more alarmingly, I bet if you looked at her record with McKinleigh, who was her only upper level horse, and who was campaigned from her California base, that she would not have gotten enough MERs to run him at the competitions that she did during his career, and she probably never would have been able to make the team.
    The qualification path for a horse/rider together is still open, all the way from lowest level to top level. Categories etc have NO bearing on that at all. This has caused a lot of confusion, because it's not very well-worded. But if Gina had another McKinlaigh she could qualify and advance up the levels just as before.

    I wrote this piece which makes it a bit clearer, I hope:
    http://e-venting.co.uk/?p=200

    Blyth's case is very unusual, of course. I really am not sure that he does need to go back down to BE100 level, I think that it's been totally confused. He got 3 MERs at 2* last year. Plus, BE100 does not qualify one for anything under FEI rules, it's far below their radar, surely?! So, it makes no sense to imply that he would have to take a new 4* ride, say, back down to BE100.
    I think that the fact that he took 2 rides to Tweseldown last weekend, one a greenie and one new one, and ran them both at BE100 (Open in the case of the more experienced new one) has perhaps been misinterpreted... no? Maybe it was due to time constraints? Maybe he just wanted a nice easy run round a small course on a new ride? I don't think he HAD to run at that level.

    By the way, we're still waiting to hear from the FEI about their decisions after receiving the Event Riders Association petition regarding MERs...



  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    11,920

    Default

    The reduced to BE100 is not correct. The lowest a rider would have to drop is to the 1* level if they have their national qualifications to run at that level. But the number of MERs to become a catorgized rider is quite high (even moreso after this year). And without a catorgization, if a rider gets the ride on a new horse, they have to redo the qualifications.

    To me, the issue IS about reining in the FEI from extending its reach and impact. The number of MERs are set too high, especially for the lower level catagorziation IMO (I don't really have much issue with setting it high for a 4* or even 3*--as I'm not sure I see the need to preserve catch riding at those levels other than for the extreme exception)...and I would rather NOT have the FEI dictating these qualifictions. I do not believe rules can impose or teach horsemanship....so burdensome qualification systems like this I believe are flawed from the start.
    Last edited by bornfreenowexpensive; Mar. 15, 2013 at 12:20 PM.
    ** The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits. -- Albert Einstein **



  7. #67
    Join Date
    Nov. 5, 2011
    Location
    Wish I knew, but the journey is interesting
    Posts
    440

    Default

    I don't think Tina Cook is qualified for 4* either http://www.equestrianteamgbr.co.uk/r...ider=tina-cook so the sooner this is sorted out, the better for eventing.



  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jul. 27, 2006
    Posts
    484

    Default

    Kim Seversen will not be qualified at for 4* either as of 2014.



  9. #69
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 1999
    Location
    Tuscaloosa, Alabama
    Posts
    11,188

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asterix View Post
    Right, and pre-novice is like training. Still kind of a giant jump back for an Olympic veteran.
    Gold medal Olympian, 2x World Champion.
    When blood is the beverage of choice, the sharpest fangs feed first.



  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    11,920

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eventingjunkie View Post
    Kim Seversen will not be qualified at for 4* either as of 2014.
    True but she is for the 3* level so all this means is after 2014, if she got a new 4* horse, she would have run I think one CIC3* and one CCI3* before tackling a 4* with that new horse. It doesn't affect her ability to take a horse she has produced and qualified to the 4*. A bit of a pain but not horrific. The issue is more riders like Blyth who are either uncatogorized or a catorgory D. They would have to run that new 3* or 4* horse all the way back at the 1* level and qualify them back up.

    I could be wrong...but that was how I read it. It will not affect riders who produce a horse up the levels but it will have some affects. My dislike of the rule....is a general dislike of the FEI extending its reach and a general dislike of rules attempting to legislate good horsemanship. I don't think either thing is good or will work as intended.
    ** The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits. -- Albert Einstein **



  11. #71
    Join Date
    Oct. 14, 2005
    Posts
    2,596

    Default

    Clearly clarification about the qualification paths is needed. No one seems entirely sure how exactly the MERs work in specific instances. I think a bigger issue is the removal of national HTs from the upper level qualifications. An experienced advanced pair that has never done an FEI event would have to drop back to the 1* level to qualify for a 3*. That seems more ridiculous than making a new partnership drop down, to me anyway.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    May. 17, 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bornfreenowexpensive View Post
    True but she is for the 3* level so all this means is after 2014, if she got a new 4* horse, she would have run I think one CIC3* and one CCI3* before tackling a 4* with that new horse. It doesn't affect her ability to take a horse she has produced and qualified to the 4*. A bit of a pain but not horrific. The issue is more riders like Blyth who are either uncatogorized or a catorgory D. They would have to run that new 3* or 4* horse all the way back at the 1* level and qualify them back up.

    I could be wrong...but that was how I read it. It will not affect riders who produce a horse up the levels but it will have some affects. My dislike of the rule....is a general dislike of the FEI extending its reach and a general dislike of rules attempting to legislate good horsemanship. I don't think either thing is good or will work as intended.
    This is absolutely right. And we shouldn't forget that this is what most riders would do anyway! WFP got the ride on a 3* new horse, Chilli Morning, last year. WFP is one of the most highly qualified Category A riders in the world, his number of MERs is through the roof, obviously, but he took the horse back to 2* level anyway. 99.9% of good horsemen and horsewomen don't need policing! The ones coming up who are delusional (when their results genuinely scream 'needs more experience!') are a different kettle of fish...
    Catch rides at top level, going straight out round a 4* course on a horse, have not been allowed for some time. Of course it was the stuff that legends were made of when Toddy did it with Horton Point and also with The Irishman, but what other riders could do it?!
    I think the argument is that 1* is too small for most horses with 3* and 4* experience. Plus, it's not fair at all on the genuine 1* competitors.
    Let's all pray that the FEI sees sense on this. Waiting to hear...


    1 members found this post helpful.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Mar. 1, 2003
    Location
    Happily in Canada
    Posts
    4,605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kerilli View Post
    WFP got the ride on a 3* new horse, Chilli Morning, last year. WFP is one of the most highly qualified Category A riders in the world, his number of MERs is through the roof, obviously, but he took the horse back to 2* level anyway.
    Clarification: Chilli Morning had already completed Burghley clear with Nick Gauntlett in 2011. WFP took him to a CCI** in May and two weeks later, a CCI***.
    Blugal

    You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng



  14. #74
    Join Date
    Oct. 13, 2002
    Location
    Idaho USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Default

    While it is logical for a new combination of 4 star horse and non catagorized rider, with 4 star experience, to run a CCI 1 star and a couple of A HTs as a systems check before heading out at a 4 star, is it also logical that the pair must do all the mandatory 1 stars, then all the mandatory 2 stars and all the mandatory 3 stars before a 4 star run? At considerable monetary cost!

    What if the rider's FEI experience, ( categorized rides), are heavily in the 3 star and 4 star levels? What if neither horse or rider has ever had a fault at those levels? Are they still to be considered incompetent at those levels?

    Easy, peasy if you live in Germany, where every competition above P is an FEI competition and costs less than our HTs to enter, not so if you live here!



Similar Threads

  1. Blyth Tait as a Clinician?
    By Ibex in forum Eventing
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Feb. 21, 2013, 05:49 PM
  2. USA's credit rating downgraded, big deal?!?
    By Shermy in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: Aug. 16, 2011, 03:23 PM
  3. Blyth Tait making comeback a la Mark Todd
    By vineyridge in forum Eventing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Mar. 4, 2011, 11:54 AM
  4. Blyth Tait as a clinician?
    By KateR in forum Eventing
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: Oct. 20, 2010, 09:25 AM
  5. Pessoa Blyth Tait Saddle
    By 2869 in forum Eventing
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Dec. 13, 2009, 03:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness